SOME 



WORCESTER MATTERS, 



1689- 1743, 



/ 



papers fig IWr. JSlafer. 

Incidents of the First and Second Settlements of 
Worcester. With fac-similes. 

Rutland and the Indian Troubles of 1723-30. Illus- 
trated, (hi press.) 

PUBLISHED BY FRANKLIN P. RICE. 



SOME 



WORCESTER MATTERS, 



1689- 1743. 



By FRANCIS E. BLAKE. 




WORCESTER, MASS. : 

FRANKLIN P. RICE, Publisher. 

MDCCCLXXXV. 



Read before The Worcester Society of Antiquity, at a regular 
meeting held April yth, 1885. 



la Excnange 
Amer. Ant. SoO, 

25 



Some Worcester Matters, 
1689 - 1743. 



DANIEL GOOKIN, THE FIRST SHERIFF OF THE COUNTY, 



Daniel Gookin was a son of Samuel Gookin, Esq., of Cambridge, 
and grandson of Major General Daniel Gookin. The date of his 
birth is unknown, but it is supposed to have been about the year 
1 700. His father was for several years Sheriff of Middlesex County, 
and his brother, Captain Samuel Gookin, Jr., an under-sheriff and 
keeper of the house of correction, while Daniel himself appears to 
have been employed in various duties about the jail and house of 
correction, having charge of the latter. Among the Middlesex 
Court Files are sundry bills rendered by him for repairs of the 
prison and for "diet" furnished certain prisoners. The frequent 
occurrence of the names of the father and his two sons savors 
somewhat of nepotism, and would at this day be dul)' considered 
by the public press. 

On the 6th of July, 1731, Captain Daniel Gookin presented to 
the Court his account, amounting to fifty shillings, for services of 
keeping the house of correction to that date ; and from that time 
his name disappears from the records of Middlesex County, he 
having received, one week previous (June 30), the appointment 



of Sheriff of the newly constituted County of Worcester, His 
training in the prison and house of correction at Cambridge, under 
the eye of his father, was, doubtless, considered by the Council in 
making the appointment. 

There are but few facts now obtainable concerning Mr. Gookin, 
and these chiefly refer to his management of the responsible office 
of Sheriff.* His name first appears upon the records of the Court 
of Sessions of the new county in August, 1732, when he presented 
for approval his first account of expenditures. The following 
November, for some unexplained reason, he withdrew this account 
and substituted another, which was allowed by the Court. 

This action would not be noticed but for the facts hereafter 
mentioned. His second account presented and allowed by the 
Court in November, 1733, is interesting as it shows a few of the 
duties of the Sheriff at that period. It is as follows : f 

October the County of Worcester Dr £ S D 

1732 to Distributing 16 proclamations for 

thanksgiving o 16 o 

to 21 County treasurey Warrants i i o 

March to 16 proclamations for a fast o 160 

April to 16 precepts i 120 

it 733 paid James Hamilton for Cloth for bedding 300 

to making the bed and Bolsters 060 

to Returning ye precepts 200 

August to 16 Tax bills & Country treasurey Warrants i 12 o 

to four blanketts for ye prison 5 40 

Nov to 16 proclamations for thanksgiving o 16 o 

Salary ending August 1733 5 00 

Keeping ye house of Corection nothing 



3 o 



Dan' Gookin 



Some items of record regarding Mr. Gookin's performance of 
official duty, which attracted my attention, may prove of interest 
to all, and instructive to those in similar positions of trust. 

*Iii 1733 he had a house lot granted him near the present corner of Main 
and Park streets. See "Records of the Proprietors." 

fThe original is in the possession of the American Antiquarian Society. 



On the ist of July, 1737, Mr. John Wolcot, administrator of the 
estate of Captain Peter Papillon, deceased, made complaint to the 
Council that one Manassah Osmore, against whom he had re- 
covered judgment, and who was committed to jail in Worcester by 
Sheriff Gookin, had "through the negligence or connivance of the 
Gaoler, made his escape & yo'' Petitioner could never yet under- 
stand it was thro' the Deficiency of the Gaol or that there was 
any break in the Gaol or any Lock broak" ; and that he, the pe- 
titioner, had thereby lost all benefit of the judgment, and that the 
said Sheriff had taken no pains to secure the escaped prisoner. 
[Mass. Archives, vol. 41, page 219.] 

Upon hearing this complaint the Council ordered the Sheriff to 
appear before them on the 14th instant, which date allowed thir- 
teen days for service of notice. The following letter from Mr. 
Gookin, written on the 14th, shows the uncertainty of communica- 
tion between the several towns in the Province, and what would 
be called to-day a slipshod method of attending to business. 

A/ay it please yo^ Excellency dj' Honourable Council 

Last night at Ten of the Clock it Being the 
Thirteenth Instant (by the Hands of Coll" Chandler) I Received a Copy of 
Mr Wolcots Petition Wherein it is your Excellencys & Hon''''' Councills 
pleasure to Direct me to appear Before your Excellency and the Hont^'^ 
Councill ye fourteenth Instant To make answer to s"^ petition which is Im- 
possible for me to do at such a short and sudden warning It very much 
Surprised me when I Saw ye Date of the order and no Longer Time to make 
my answer and should not Have Known it now if it had [not] been very 
accidently Brought by Mr. Dwight a Tavern keeper in Boston who Told me 
it was Left at his house for Conveyance, but by whom he knows not. I 
would Therefore Humbly Intreat yo^ Excellency and y' Honb'«' Council That 
that petition may be suspended untill I can have Time to make my answer 
to it. I Humbly Begg yr Excellency and Hon""^ favour in this 

affair and Humbly Subscribe myself Yo'' Excellencys and Hon"''' most Dutifull 
and obedient Servt Dan' Gookin 

Worcester July 14 1737 
[Mass. Archives, vol. 105, page 148.] 

The hearing was postponed from time to time until Oct. 6, 1 737, 
when the Sheriff presented himself, and, "having made some ex- 



cuses was ordered to withdraw & the complaint to ly for further 
Consideration" ; and this, so far as the records are concerned, 
appears to be the end of that affair. 

On the 4th of April, 1 740, a similar complaint against the Sheriff 
was made by Hezekiah Maynard, but on the 1 7th instant Mr. 
Maynard acknowledged that he had received the amount of his 
judgment, and appeared satisfied. However, upon the same day, 
Mr. Paul Brintnall complained that the Sheriff had liberated from 
jail one James Holden, Jr., of Worcester, against whom he had 
recovered judgment in the sum of ;^33, 1 7, i ; that he had made 
frequent applications for his money, but had received only £2^. 
He adds : "Unless aided by the Justice of your Excellency & 
Honours [he] is well assured that He shall never get one farthing 
more altho' your Petitioner shall sue him. The demonstration of 
which arises from the Office He Sustains & the Circumstances He 
is in. Wherfore as he is an officer appointed by your Excellency 
& Honours as it is a most Grievous thing that the subject should be 
put to their Action for all the Money he gets into His hands by 
force of any Executions committed to him he prays the Compas- 
sionate & just regards of your Excellency & Honours to a whole- 
Country & Province by the amendment or removal of so bad an 
officer & as in duty bound shall ever pray." 

The Council thereupon directed the Secretary to write to Mr. 
Gookin, and order him to appear before them the following week. 
The letter of the Secretary is here given : 

Boston April 17 1740. 
Sir 

I am directed by the Gov'' & Council to acquaint you 
that they are much displeased with you that your Conduct gives them so 
much Trouble of hearing so many Complaints. And that if you don't pres- 
ently reform, they will take Care to remedy these things by putting in an 
other Officer in your room. Your humble Servant 

J. WiLLARD. 

The Sheriff, however, did not appear at the time named, and an 
order was sent him to attend the Council at its next meeting the 
following week "upon pain of their highest Displeasure." The 



displeasure of the honorable body must have been great when 
they found upon the day fixed that Mr. Gookin had concluded 
not to come to Boston in person, but had sent a letter instead. 
This letter read as follows : 

April 29, 1741. 
May it please yo*^ Excellency and your Honb'« Council These 
may Certify That I have paid Mr Brintnall his Debt & Charges as yo"" Ex- 
cellency and Hon" will see by his Receipt I Do Heartily acknowledge 
That it was by my means that mr Holding was Dismist out of Gaol His 
parents Came to me (They being my near neighbours) and was so Concerned 
for their son being in prison and were grieved and made so many promisses 
for the Speedy payment of the Remainding part of the Debt That I had 
Compassion on their aged Tears and Did upon their promise Dismiss him 
but Their faihng of their promise has put me to this Cost and Trouble. 

I Do Therefore Humbly Intreat yo'' Excellency and Hon""* to Take these 
Lines into yo"" wise Consideration and according to yo"' Great Clemency and 
Goodness Have Compassion on me and family and wherein I have offended 
yo'' Excellency and Hon'''* and any Others I will by Divine assistance Do so 
no more Mr Brintnall might had his money when he was up the Last Time 
but Refus'' it it was offered him as yo'' Excellency and Hon'''' may see on ye 
Back of the Complaints But being instigated by some malicious persons as 
is by Every body supposed would not Take it for it was Thought would be a 
means of my being Dismis'' from my office; I Therefore Humbly Intreat yo'' 
Excellency and Hon"" that you would be pleas'* in yo'" Great wisdom to Con- 
tinue me Still and I Shall (in all Regards) indeavor a universall amendment 
for the Time to Come upon all accounts 

I am yo'' Excellency's and Hon'''' most unworthy (tho' most obedient) 
Servt Dan' Gchjkin 

[Mass. Archives, vol. 41. page 509.] 

This letter was accompanied by certificates of Joshua Eaton, Jr. 
and Isaac Barnard that the complaint of Mr. Brintnall had been 
read to Mr. Gookin, and an acknowledgment of Mr. Brintnall 
(witnessed by Caleb Johnson and William Jennison) that he had 
received the money claimed by him. There is also a brief note 
from William Jennison stating that Mr. Brintnall might have had 
his money five days before, but would not take it because Mr. 
Gookin was unwilling to pay ^8. for charge and trouble. 

The Council peremptorily ordered the Sheriff to be present at 
the meeting on the 29th of May next following, and Mr. Gookin 



appears to have been sufficiently impressed by the order, and 
made his appearance. The Council record reads [May 29, 1740] : 
"Daniel Gookin Esq"" Sheriff of the County of Worcester, being by 
the order of this Board of the first of May last required to attend 
this Board to answer for his disobedience in not appearing person- 
ally upon divers summons as also for his neglect & misconduct in 
his office, appeared this day and after he was heard in answer to 
these complaints, His ExcelF^ admonish"* him for his ill conduct 
and warned him against such behaviour for the time to come lest 
he should render himself utterly unworthy of his office." 

Notwithstanding this reprimand, within two weeks another com- 
plaint was made that he had paid over only a portion of a debt 
recovered in a case (Andrew Caverly vs. Thomas Harback and 
James Waite of Worcester) , but no action appears on the records ; 
and in October following, a similar complaint was preferred by 
Joseph Crosby, of Worcester, which was subsequently dismissed 
by the Council. 

Accompanying this last complaint is the following interesting 
letter addressed to Governor Belcher by Hon. John Chandler, the 
Chief Justice : 

Worcester January 26"' 1 740/1 
Alay It Please Your Excellency 

I am very sensible Mr Sheriff Gookin 
has some enemies in this County as well as myself; I suppose we are envyed 
because we (by your Excellency's favour) enjoy Posts of Profitt within the 
same. 

I humbly apprehend if it be True what he tells me as doubtless tis, our 
neighbor Crosby had no Reason to Complain; However that be, yet I would 
humbly beg leave to inform your Excellency, that his conduct since he was 
before your Excellency and the Honourable Board is less Exceptionable 
then before. 

I humbly ask your Excellencys Pardon for making this Excuse for Mr 
Gookin, when my own conduct is so Liable to Exceptions. 

But Relying upon your Excellencys great Goodness to excuse mine, 
I am S"' your Excellencys 

most Humic Obed' & DutifuU Servant 

John Chandler 



The reason for Judge Chandler's allusion to his own conduct 
being liable to exceptions, was on account of his connection with 
the Land Bank Scheme, to which I shall presently refer. 

With this gratifying statement of the Judge that Mr. Gookin 
had made some improvement in the management of his ofifice, we 
must leave the subject, trusting that before his death in June, 
1743,* he became a model Sheriff. 

The inventory of his estate, presented by Jabez Tatman, shows 
a value of only ;£i^4. in all, which indicates that he did not grow 
rich during his administration. In the settlement of the estate no 
mention is made of his wife or children, although he had four 
children in Cambridge. 

MANUFACTORY BILLS OR LAND BANK SCHEME. 

In the year 1 740 the Province of Massachusetts Bay was passing 
through a period of financial diiificulties occasioned by an over- 
issue of paper currency, whereby the credit of the Province was 
placed in a lamentable condition. Many schemes to meet the 
exigency and relieve the distress were proposed and abandoned ; 
and to add to the difficulty of the situation, Governor Belcher and 
his Council were not in accord with the views of the House as to 
the solution of the problem. 

Among the plans proposed by private individuals was that 
known as the Manufactory Company or Land Bank Scheme. 
This company was organized with about four hundred partners, 
with the design to loan the sum of ^150,000 on notes on land 
security, payable in twenty years in various articles of merchandise. 
The Governor was bitterly opposed to this company, and issued 
proclamations denouncing it as a fraud, and enjoining upon all in 
the civil and mihtary service of the Province to discountenance it 
in every way upon peril of dismissal. 

Among the papers in the State Archives are lists returned by 
Registers of Deeds of all mortgages recorded in behalf of this 

*June 17th, 1743, the Council had notice of his death, and on the 23d 
appointed Benjamin Flagg as his successor. 



lO 

company. In these lists the names of many Worcester men ap- 
pear, among them the following : Daniel Bigelow, Robert Barber, 
Daniel Boyden, John Boyden, Luke Brown, Palmer Goulding, 
Elisha Hedge, James How, William Johnson, James Holden, 
Henry Lee, James Moore, Matthias Rice, Eliakim Rice, Gershom 
Rice, Jr., Jotham Rice, John Stearns, Daniel Ward. 

The Bank proved a sad failure either from the unsoundness of 
its basis, or the determined opposition of the Governor, or from 
both causes. 

My object in bringing this to your notice is to present letters 
from three gentlemen holding official positions in Worcester, show- 
ing their relations to the scheme, and with what spirit they "faced 
the music." The first letter is from William Jennison, Esq., one 
of the Justices of the Court of Common Pleas ; the second from 
Chief Justice John Chandler ; and the third from Henry Lee, Esq., 
one of the Justices of the Peace. 

On the 6th of January, 1 740/1, by order of the Council, letters 
were addressed by the Secretary to the several Courts in the 
Province, instructing them "to take all convenient opportunities 
and methods both when in Court, and when separate to prevent 
the spreading of the great Fraud & particularly you are desired 
strictly to charge your officers by no means to pass receive or 
countenance the said Bills." [Mass. Archives, vol. 102, page 130.] 

In addition to this circular letter, it is very probable that specific 
charges were brought to the notice of the three gentlemen above 
named. 

Mr. Jennison 's reply was as follows : 

Worcester January ye 9'^ i74o[i] 
Honored Sir 

This day I Receiued yours wharein your honour 
Informs me that his Exlency the Govenour and the Hono'« Council are in- 
formed that I haue in Couriged the passing of the bills called manifactory 
bills over His Excellencys proclamation to warn all offesors in the Gouerment 
against In coriging the same Hon"i Sir this is to inform your honour thet 
be fou'' nor sen his Excellencys procklimation I never did anything to in 
Corige the pasing of S^ bills for I never Licked them so well neather was I 
any way conserned about that afayor for I never Licked the Skeme that was 



Laid about S^ bills I can't say but I have sum time past Reseved sum of S"* 
bills but at this time I han't one of them and had youre honour not wrot to 
me about them I had Concluded not to have tacken them any moore 

I am Redy to answer any Complaint made against me on that acount sir & 
that I have write is the truth of the mater honored sir pray Give my duty to 
his Excellency and the hon'''<' Council and Sir I am your Honours most 
humbel Saruant 

William Jennison 

[Mass. Archives, vol. I02, page 132. This letter is in Mr. Jennison's hand- 
writing.] 

Judge Chandler's reply was : 

Worcester jAN'ry loth 1 740/1 
Honbi Sr 

Your letter of ye 6'^ Instant I Rec*^ by Oliver 
Partridge Esq. and in answer to it would Humbly say. 

I account it my Hon'' and Happiness to have such for my Judges in this 
affair, as I am Sure will hear me with Patience and give Judgment with mercy; 
So agreeable to their Known Justice, goodness & Clemency. 

The Truth of ye affair is this; vizt; the night before I was called before ye 
Governour and Councill I was Accidentally in Company with Capt Blanchard 
& two or three people living his way, and discourseing about the Line between 
This, & the province of New Hampshire, as Lately Settled by the King in 
Councill, I ask'd him whither Groton Gore so called, being a Tract of Land 
Lately Granted by the Generall Court would fall into New Hampshire, he 
said it would. I Replyed, I have one hundred Acres of Land in said Gore, 
and since it falls out of the province, I w** sell it him for Just what he \vd give, 
& if he said Twas worth nothing, he should have it free or words to that effect. 
After a few words pass'd, he Reply'd I will give you four pound in Manufac- 
tory Bills & no more. I told him he had my word, and I would not go back, 
accordingly he paid me the Same at that time. The next day & soon after 
Mr. Blanchard* had been before ye Gov'' & Councill, my Self being sent for 
also, I desired him to keep ye money till I had been up, being under Surprize 
& concern, but as the property was in me the Night before and as I informed 
the Hon**' Board how much I had in which Sum was -included Said four 
pounds, I apprehended I did not Break my promis in taking what was my 
own before I beheve I told this To the Hon'^' Sam^ Danforth Esq"^ in Mr. 
Blanchards presence in order to set the matter in a True Light. I would Add 
that before Capt Blanchard & my Self had finished our Bargain Mr Partridge 

* Mr. Blanchard lost his position through his connection with the scheme. 



12 

I think came into ye same Room and heard Something of the Affair, & 1 left 
him with Mr. Blanchard and the other people. 

This may it please Your Hon"", is the Truth of this Story, if it is a Crime 
twas done in a Surprize, I hope my thus frankly discovering ye whole matter 
will not be improved to my disgrace or hurt, but Rather intitle me to favour, 
and Especially Since in answer to ye last Clause in your Hon" Letter : I do 
with great freeness Sincerity and Honesty declare that I will not give coun- 
tenance directly or indirectly to the Bills called Land Bank or Manufactory 
Bills. This is my firm and finall Resolution in the affair. 
I am Hon''! S' 

Your very humble 

most Obhged and 

Obedt Sert 
To the Honbi John Chandler 

Josiah Willard Esq"-. 

[Mass. Archives, vol. 102, page 133. This letter is a fine specimen of pen- 
manship.] 

The following is Mr. Lee's letter : 

From Henry Lee to Hon Josiah Willard, Secretary &c 
Sir 

In obedience to yours of April 3*^ I hereby Inform your Honour 
that haveing to the Best of my Power strictly Examined the Manufactory 
Scheam with all the Proceedings on it I am fully of opinion 'tis well calculated 
to serve the Interest of the Province and therefore am determined to do what 
I can to Encourage it and think that the Priviledge of an Englishman is my 
Suffishant warrant therefor espechally as it is not Contrary to aney lawfull 
Authority to do so for I never beared that the undertakers had evere a hering 
therefore think it impossible they should be condemned as yet — 

As I act my conscience I Regard being Punished aney way for Differing in 
my opinion from the Governor and Council to be a Civil Persecution and to 
be deprived of my office untell I be Proved unfaithfull in it or have violate 
the laws of the Land I Look on as an invasion of my Native Rights But on 
the whole I think it [degrading?] your honours to aney man to sustain an 
office which must obledge him to so grate a meanness as blindly to follow the 
Inclinations of those above him tho not Prescribed much less Supported by 
Laws therefore to sacrifice my Post for the Servis of my Cuntry is Infinitely 
more Honourable then to keep it on such Base Condittions I am S'' your 
Humb' Servant 

Worcester Apl 14: 1741 Henry Lee 

[Mass. Archives, vol. 102, page 153. This letter is not in Mr. Lee's hand- 
writing, but his signature is affixed to it.] 



Without passing judgment upon the letters of Messrs. Jennison 
and Chandler, most certainly that of Mr. Lee is worthy of our 
highest commendation. The spirit manifested by him indicates 
his manliness in living up to his convictions of right ; that same 
spirit which has given inspiration to multitudes under trial, and 
has led brave men to face dangers fearful and foes most bitter. 

The explanations of Messrs. Jennison and Chandler were, doubt- 
less, satisfactory ; but we can imagine the reception accorded to 
Mr. Lee's, and scarcely need to read that at a meeting of the 
Council, April 30, 1741, after hearing the above letter read, it was 
voted that Henry Lee be "dismissed and removed from his office 
of a Justice of the Peace in the County of Worcester." 



PALMER GOULDING S CURE. 

In 1 734 Palmer Goulding, of Worcester, petitioned the General 
Court for a gift of land in consideration of his making known an 
"infallible cure" for the bite of the rattlesnake. He failed to ob- 
tain what he desired, but in 1741 made another attempt, and pre- 
sented the following petition : 

"Palmer Goulding to General Court Sept 23 1741, 

"The memoriall of Palmer Goulding of Worcester Humbly 
Sheweth 

"That your memorialist in his travills, has with a Considerable 
Cost, attained to Such Skill and Knowledge, in the Curing the 
bite of a Ratle Snake, that were he present when a person was bit, 
he Could So soon Efectually Cure it, that y^ person would never 
be Sensible of any hurt, and the Same medison if Ritely aplyed, 
has no les operation on y^ Body of men to Cure any Enflamation 
of ys blood, or to prevent or Cure any breding Sore Whatsoever, 
a womans Sore brest or fever Sores, it is allso an Enfallible med- 
ison to Cure or prevent the Coming of fistilorr or pole Evill in 
horses, which Knowledge he is very willing to Comunicate for y^ 
good of mankind But inasmuch as he was Really at Considerable 



14 



Cost in gaining y^ same, he most humbl}' prays your Excellency 
and Honers, would upon his So doing, be pleased to make him a 
grant of Sum of the wild and uncultivated Lands of the Province, 
and your memorialist will Cheerfully Submit to Such terms or con- 
ditions Respecting Setling, as your Excellency and Honers In your 
Great Wisdom Shall think proper & as in Duty Bound Shall Ever 
pray &c Palmer Gould ing" 

[Mass. Archives, vol. 105, page 168.] 

The House of Representatives ordered that a tract of two hun- 
dred acres of land be granted Mr. Goulding upon certain condi- 
tions, and with the proviso that he should give such a description 
of the medicine that it might be publicly known, and bring credible 
proof of his having successfully applied the remedy in the several 
cases mentioned in the memorial, "whereof yet there is no certain 
demonstration." 

The Council refused to concur, but the matter was again brought 
up the following year and passed. I fail, however, to find any 
record of a survey or plan of land returned by Mr. Goulding, pos- 
sibly because of his inability to satisfy the authorities as to the 
value of his discovery. 

Accompanying these petitions are quite a number of certificates 
to the efficacy of the medicine. John Gray, of Worcester, had a 
heifer bitten in one of her feet by a rattlesnake, and Mr. Goulding 
gave her "some boiled herbs & cured her." Jacob Holmes was 
equally fortunate with a steer, after using a "root about y« Bigness 
of a wallnut" ; and John Durkin certified that some one gave him 
a horse that had been bitten by a rattlesnake, and after Mr. Gould- 
ing had applyed his remedies the creature "became a Considerable 
Horse again. '' 

There are other certificates of equal value from men residing in 
the neighboring towns. It would be interesting to know if this 
remedy was ever disclosed to the public, or if the descendants of 
Mr. Goulding, still living in Worcester, can throw any light upon 
the matter. 



15 



PETITION OF INHABITANTS OF THE GORE. 

The following is a copy of a petition of several inhabitants of 
the Gore between Sutton and Worcester, asking to be annexed to 
the latter town. 

"February 14 : 1742/3 
"To the of Worcester etc. 

"The Humble Petition of us y^ 
Subscribers being Propriators of Lands in the County of Worces- 
ter & Adjoyning to said Town of Worcester and are now Living on 
said Land Called the County Goar and several of us having part 
of our Lands in Said Town of Worcester and what priuelidge we 
have AUredy Received, both sivel and Ecliseastical we Redeily 
acknowlidg we have Received in said Town of Worcester from 
both minister & people which lays us under Strong obligations to 
offer our Selves with our Lands Lying in Said Gore to be annexed 
to Said Town of Worcester as a part of Said Town both to doe 
Duty and Receive priuelidg if y^ Hon'"''' General Court So order it. 

"Gentlm our Desire & Request is that the Town of Worcester 
will take our Difficult Circumstances in such a Dark and Difficult 
day as this is under Consideration and So far Incourige us as to 
pass a vote of said Town with Submition to General Court to ac- 
cept of us & our lands aforesd to be annexed as a part of said 
Town of Worcester both to doe Duty & to Receive priuelidges 
Equil to other Inhabitents of said Town 

"And Further to appoint a Comitte to Prefifer a Petition with us 
the Subscribors to the grate and General Court in order to obtain 
y^ desired End or any other way that the Town in their wisdom 
Shall think best to obtain an act of y^ General Court for that pur- 
pose 

"Gent'''m we offer one thing more to your Consideration which 
Incouriges us to ask such a feauour ; besides the peace and good 
order, those is in y^ Church and Town which is Sufificiant wear 
there no other — part of y^ aforesd land was formerly Remoued 
by y'^ General Court from y^ place whear your meetinghouse now 



i6 



stands for y^ accomodating of your Town, to y^ place, and being 
part of y'^ land above mentioned & with that Reserve that it Joyned 
to Worcester ; which seems to us strongly Inplyed by y^ General 
Court that it was their Intention that part of said Land Last men- 
tioned should be annexed to the Town of Worcester if not part of 
sd Town 

"And as in Duty bound shall ever pray &c 

"Ephrim Curtis 
"a. true Coppy Exam" "Thomas Richardson 

"f Jonas Rice T CI "Danil Boyden 

"Timothy Green 
"John Barber 
"Jabez Tatman 
"Matthias Rice" 

[Mass. Archives, vol. 115, page 9. The Petition to the General 
Court for this object is in Mass. Archives, vol. 115, pages 22-23. 
A copy is printed in "Early Records of the Town of Worcester," 
Book II., page 38. It will be found in the second volume of The 
Worcester Society of Antiquity's Collections.] * 

ADDITIONAL ITEMS. 

The following items escaped my notice while preparing the 
paper entitled hicidents of the First and Second Settlements of 
Worcester-, read before the Society last year. 

"July 22, 1689. Ordered that six men be allowed for the strength- 
ening of the Garrison at Worcester until farther orders. 

"Sept. I, 1689 10"' powder & shot to be furnished to Capt Wing & 
Serg' Edw'^ Taylor, John Pym, and John Carely were dis- 
mist from prison upon the promise to go out with Cap"" 
Wing to y*' Garrison at Worcester. 

*The original petition of the inhabitants of the north part of Worcester, 
now Holden, for incorporation as a district or town, with accompanying 
papers, is in Mass. Archives, vol. 114, pages 525, 558, 590. The documents 
are printed in full in the History of Holden. 



17 

"Aug 9, 1689. Cap''^ Wing have six of the soldiers late drawn off 
from Sagadahock to be sett up to the Reliefe of Worces- 
ter And that Captain Wing discharge their Quarters : And 
dispose of them for the safety of said place. Cap""^ Timothy 
Prout is likewise ordered to deliver to Cap"* Wing Ten 
pound of powder and a proportionable Quantity of Shott 
for the use of Worcester. 

"Oct 25, 169 1. In answer to Capt Jno Wing his pet" ordered that 
Capt Penn Townsend Capt Ephraim Hunt and decon John 
Haynes be aded to Capt Jn° prentice mr Adam Winthrop 
Capt Jn° Wing [who] were appointed to be of a Comittee 
for the ordering and setling of the plantation called Wor- 
cester Anny four of them being fully Impowered to Act 
in that affair according to former order of this Court." 
[Mass. Archives, vol. 81 : Council Records.] 

The names of Mr. Townsend and Mr. Hunt have not before 
appeared in the lists of committees for managing Worcester affairs. 



iutH 13 '-iOf 



niS,?"^ OF CONGRESS 

iPi 

014 079 631 1 J 



